I know this board struggled with the concept of hypothesis last time but here goes nothing. If a superior creature were to inhabit our planet, an infinitley more intelligent and sophisticated organism, would it be morally right for them to battery farm us, hunt us for fun and experiment on us? In fact let's just bring it down to the one the pro-vivisectionists always spew up, medicine. Would it be morally right for them to experiment on us for their own medical research?
A superior creature may not adhere to the same moral code as human beings. ipso facto ad nauseum I claudius.
RE: Oh no you don't. So it's ok to say, "I'm just looking after my species and **** the rest"? Might is right?
RE: Oh no you don't. Your question is flawed. Do animals want to be experimented on ? Probably not. Would humans want to be experimented on ? Most of us probably not. It would happen anyway if a superior race deemed it to happen. Just as animal experimenting happens now. As the (supposedly) superior race deems it to happen. Should it happen ? That's a wide ranging debate. Part of which is the moral aspect. It cannot be parametered like you just did.
Of course it can. Is it morally right for a superior species to experiment on a lower one for it's own medical research or not?
RE: Of course it can. Morally I do not think it is right for any individual or group to take advantage of a weaker individual or group. If all decisions are made on a moral basis then we'd be right. They aren't unfortunately.
it would be for them not for us as we'd be being tested on. its a toughy as it all comes down to the survival of the fittest scenario - we're the dominant species so we use animals for our own means. i don't agree with the whole idea of animal testing but if i ever knew someone who had cancer or a terminal illness then my answer might be different
Would it be morally right to eat us Assuming that the superior alien race were carnivors I suspect they would quite like to tuck in. dont really see the difference between eating to ensure the survival of the species to research for the same thing - in moral terms anyway
RE: Would it be morally right to eat us Neither do I. I just thought I'd keep it simple. You know how people try to fudge the issue instead of answering the question.
So, with the exception of Dirk Hartog,............. ....no-one can handle the uncomfortable truth that the hypothesis proves. Either animal experimentation is wrong (which I believe to be so) or might is right and therefore so is is going to war for oil and a host of other unsavoury practices.
No. If we were invaded by 'superior beings' such as big intelligent spiders - then yes - I would gladly give myself up for experimentation. I'm a career employee. I do what the boss says.
Problem is (as always?) - you see things as being simply right or wrong. Nearly all issues have complexity.`Just one aspect of this from my point of view is that animals do not know that they are being used for testing - they just live and die. For me, it is that life and death that is important. I think it is wrong to inflict pain and suffering and so I guess that means I'd be against most animal testing. However, if the animal has a pleasant, pain free life and reasonable death (difficult to say a nice death but I think you get my drift) then I'd have no objections. As for the aliens - as long as we didn't know that they were using us for testing (and I'm sure that they'd be intelligent enough to be able to swing that) and were just giving us loads of food, telly and footy then I reckon we'd be happy.
Is it morally right to eat any animal? Surely it's the same thing. We breed them to eat, we breed them for testing...what's the difference?